Unfrigginbelievable!

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Oh great. Now I've got YOU agreeing with me. ;-)

F You! We're done!

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Just out curiosity, for those that are still up in arms, how many have actually read the affidavit in support of emergency child protection? My guess is about zero, or next to zero.

If you read it, you will see it went down pretty much as already discussed here.....warrant properly served and executed, they arrive on the compound, observe minors pregnant or with kids (which means on its face that stat rape has occurred...en mass), they start interviewing people, stonewalling occurs, and even worse...some people cannot or will not even identify their own parents.

What is the state supposed to do? leave? do nothing? If the FLDS want to hurry things along, dont hide out in the temple and refuse to cooperate by providing information when CPS is interviewing you about your kid.

This whole situation is a mess, and the FLDS have not helped it at all.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...081texas1.html

I haven't read it. I'm just curious why the state of Texas would make it one big hearing on all 400+ children rather than doing it case by case.

Maybe I just don't understand due process. Or maybe I don't understand why a state believes it knows what is best for the small children. I can understand protecting teenage girls from people like Warren Jeffs, but taking two year old kids out of the arms of their mothers?

How would your triplets react if the state of California decided that there was something going on in your household and your little ones would be better off under the watch the state rather than your wife because of something you did? (This isn't personal, I'm just trying to get you to see it from the perspective of hating to see small kids in an emotional wreck because they don't understand what the hell is going on.)

My personal opinion is that I see a lot of this being small town politics by a community of evangelicals. I'm not so much up in arms as I am in trying to understand why it would go down like it did.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

I haven't read it. I'm just curious why the state of Texas would make it one big hearing on all 400+ children rather than doing it case by case.

Maybe I just don't understand due process. Or maybe I don't understand why a state believes it knows what is best for the small children. I can understand protecting teenage girls from people like Warren Jeffs, but taking two year old kids out of the arms of their mothers?

How would your triplets react if the state of California decided that there was something going on in your household and your little ones would be better off under the watch the state rather than your wife because of something you did? (This isn't personal, I'm just trying to get you to see it from the perspective of hating to see small kids in an emotional wreck because they don't understand what the hell is going on.)

My personal opinion is that I see a lot of this being small town politics by a community of evangelicals. I'm not so much up in arms as I am in trying to understand why it would go down like it did.

Nothing personal taken, I get where you are going.

I will take a stab at making an analogous example, using my triplets.

Cops get an anonymous tip that I am abusing a kid in my house.

Cops get a warrant and go into my home. They find three kids. Not sure who the parents are because nobody will talk. What do the cops do?

Also, while they are in my house, they notice a bunch of other people, not related to me or the original complaint, and these people are clearly breaking the law. So the cops can now arrest these folks as well. So they haul everyone in and seize the evidence.

I don't know how to explain it any more plainly that that.

The cops do NOT have to go back and get warrants for everyone else in my house that is clearly breaking the law. They now can simply act based off what they see in plain site.

You seem to be defining due process in that situation as having the cops leave my house, go get multiple warrants, and come back. it doesnt work that way.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

How about due process? If Texas was interested in this little thing that's mentioned in the US Constitution, why, as Mike pointed out, would it have been done as one single hearing rather than a case by case situation?

I'm asking this as a non-lawyer. I hate what Jeffs stands for, but I don't see how the state of Texas can do this.

And why do feel you don't need to explain your belief about how it went down? You said it's ok that it happened this way. Why?

Look, the law isn't always easily understood. That is why people make careers out of its interpretation. Obviously, I am impatient with what I perceive as contempt for the government leading many of you to assume that something inappropriate occurred when you don't really have any good reason to.

Due process is a complex concept. There is an ocean of case law that interprets that little phrase. What it guarantees, what it does not. This is particularly so in the arena of parental rights. Texas has a statutory scheme in place that is meant to balance the rights of parents against the best interests of the children. The lawyers here who practice domestic on this board (not me) will tell you that best interest of the child is the coin of the realm in all matters relating to them.

So the question is, if a dangerous condition exists within a closed insular community, whatever it is, can a judge on a preliminary basis conclude that all the children are in danger until full, individual hearings can be had? Yes, she can. My understanding is that there will be individual status hearings for each child in the next 60 days while he DNA and other evidence is sorted out. At the end of that, on an individual basis, the decision will be evaluated.

What I want some of you to try to wrap your heads around is that the judge has erred on the side of caution, not on a permanent basis, but on a temporary one. The potential harm of returning the children is much greater, again on a temporary basis, than a disruption of what amounts to a few months. This is exactly where she should be erring. We err on the side of protecting these children and allow the rights of these parents to be held in limbo for a relatively short time. The real question to me is how could the government ever afford the luxury of the assumption that these children will be safe while they await the hearings based on what has been alleged? It can't afford that assumption.

What if rather than being forced to marry and have sex young girls were being sacrificed. Would it really make sense to say, well the boys and the infants ought to be safe so lets turn them back over while we sort this out. Of course not.

[SeattleUte]

exUte's new passion for civil liberties is touching. Actually, exUte only cheapens and soils the whole otherwise completely noble concept.

[exUte]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

How about due process? If Texas was interested in this little thing that's mentioned in the US Constitution, why, as Mike pointed out, would it have been done as one single hearing rather than a case by case situation?

I'm asking this as a non-lawyer. I hate what Jeffs stands for, but I don't see how the state of Texas can do this.

And why do feel you don't need to explain your belief about how it went down? You said it's ok that it happened this way. Why?

of local pressure to rid themselves of the FLDS. The locals were suspicious because they were so secretive. they had an informant for 4 years on the premises and couldn't come up with something. So they found someone to call in a bogus claim (geez, what happened to Swinton....no one has heard from or seen her.......and the records are sealed........for a misdemeanor?) and it gave them an excuse to go on a fishing expedition. Even drug smugglers have their rights protected more than this group. Pretty pathetic. But then again, wasn't Waco and the same CPS broad, in Texas?

[exUte]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Just out curiosity, for those that are still up in arms, how many have actually read the affidavit in support of emergency child protection? My guess is about zero, or next to zero.

If you read it, you will see it went down pretty much as already discussed here.....warrant properly served and executed, they arrive on the compound, observe minors pregnant or with kids (which means on its face that stat rape has occurred...en mass), they start interviewing people, stonewalling occurs, and even worse...some people cannot or will not even identify their own parents.

What is the state supposed to do? leave? do nothing? If the FLDS want to hurry things along, dont hide out in the temple and refuse to cooperate by providing information when CPS is interviewing you about your kid.

This whole situation is a mess, and the FLDS have not helped it at all.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...081texas1.html

in the compound? So that claim is gonzo. but they have to do DNA testing to find out who belongs to who? Where is Ms. Swinton? she made the call into the authorities. No one, no one seems to know and the records are sealed. You assume no wrong doing on the government's part. the sniff test tells me otherwise.

[exUte]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

I haven't read it. I'm just curious why the state of Texas would make it one big hearing on all 400+ children rather than doing it case by case.

Maybe I just don't understand due process. Or maybe I don't understand why a state believes it knows what is best for the small children. I can understand protecting teenage girls from people like Warren Jeffs, but taking two year old kids out of the arms of their mothers?

How would your triplets react if the state of California decided that there was something going on in your household and your little ones would be better off under the watch the state rather than your wife because of something you did? (This isn't personal, I'm just trying to get you to see it from the perspective of hating to see small kids in an emotional wreck because they don't understand what the hell is going on.)

My personal opinion is that I see a lot of this being small town politics by a community of evangelicals. I'm not so much up in arms as I am in trying to understand why it would go down like it did.

Small town politics and a willing accomplice whose name is Swinton.

[exUte]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

exUte's new passion for civil liberties is touching. Actually, exUte only cheapens and soils the whole otherwise completely noble concept.

Civil liberties are the core of our society. Some civil liberty issues are simply ammunition for those with a political agenda.

Even you can understand that. Can't you?

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by exUte

in the compound? So that claim is gonzo. but they have to do DNA testing to find out who belongs to who? Where is Ms. Swinton? she made the call into the authorities. No one, no one seems to know and the records are sealed. You assume no wrong doing on the government's part. the sniff test tells me otherwise.

This is where you are fundamentally flawed.

I assume nothing. You are the one assuming everything.

I am waiting for more information. You are up in arms.

This will play itself out. If Texas was in error, these kids will eventually be returned to their parents. The state will pay them a huge chunk of change, thereby allowing them to recruit even more members to their polygamous society. The children will be subjected to even more indoctrination that anything outside the compound is evil. And all the young little female 4 year olds can start prepping to have sex in about 10 years....err....I mean to get married.

The joy of such a happy ending practically brings a tear to my eye.